do they work together?

i'd make the argument that right now, no, they do not. the people in power are in power because of money, and they're willing to keep their power by any means possible. they're doing that by helping other rich people, and because of this they've frozen a market that should be freewheeling.

discuss.

I'd say that it's kind of naive to call what we have now a true democracy. In both their ideal states, I guess they'd go together well. I'd say socialism and true democracy would probably be the best match though. But I'm no expert.

i think it was marx that argued capitalism and democracy could never match together in their ideal states.

but, capitalism is supposed to be a free market with no government intervention. i believe government should be, in some cases, involved with business though.

when i asked my friend 'what are we supposed to do, outlaw the rich from running for office?' he didn't have a comeback, and i could see this as a possible problem.

Funny, I was just thinking about this earlier today and came to the opposite conclusion?: capitalism can only work in a democracy.

I've always felt that the problem is not with capitalism itself, but when a select few privileged ones get a competitive advantage from friends in the gov't, therby distorting the market.

There is one thing to be said against capitalism that I consider very valid, and that is that you cannot expect the market to answer all our normative social questions.

Supposing we find a cure for AIDS or cancer, how should we decide who gets the benefit of such a cure? Turning to the market seems wholly unsatisfactory.

I felt though that without any government regulation, you are going to see a few huge monopolies owning everything and they will end up doing anything they want regardless if they have friends in the government.

I'm not positive that this model can sustain itself. There's always a few plucky entrepeneurs out there that can find a niche in the market. It's never easy, but life's not easy.

Look at the phone and airline industries for a couple examples. Once they got deregulated, they've improved quite a lot due to some fierce competition.

I think the two can co-exist quite easily. But not with the current campaign finance laws. I think that campaign contributions of any kind should only be allowed by individuals. In election years third party financing of issue advertising should not be allowed.

Don't you think capitalism would work fine in a monarchy or republic?

I think democracy can only work within a capitalist economy. The idea of democracy is that the population is the best judge of what laws/leaders are best for them, just like capitalism lets the marketplace decide what products people feel are best for them. How would Democracy function without society being based on free choice (the essence of capitalism)?

Socialism requires a level of central planning and control, which is more suited to industrial-aristocratic leadership (like China for example). I think people have a misunderstanding of Socialism actually is. Europe is not Socialist, they are the "third way".




Green Habit is correct, monopolies only occur through government regulation and interference in the market.

What kind of monarchy? As for republic, isn't that a kind of democracy anyway?

Corporations are going to absorb other smaller companies even without government regulation. What happens to the people who have a small business and can't compete with these large corporations? That isn't any more a "free market" than one with some regulation.

Well, I won't be quite so absolute. You can have other monopolies, but they'd occur either by the entire market approving of one provider in a certain sector (great if it happens, but unlikely), or if resources are so scarce that it's impossible to have proper competition.

Capitalism and Democracy are opposites

Can you give me an example of a Democracy that is not a capitalistic economy?

Allendes democratically voted to power, also a Communist.

He was elected in a capitalist nation, Chile, which is just more evidence of my point of view.

And it was in his manifesto to end elections?

Besides without any regulation whatsoever, you are going to have companies that are going to be taking advantage of workers and consumers.

And with widespread regulation you will have companies looking to the government for subsidies and trade barriers that are beneficial to them. These also are generally to the detriment of the consumers.